MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: 123RF new prices and licenses  (Read 4412 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: March 04, 2008, 08:33 »
0
123 RF announces new credit packages, new extended licenses and new download sizes :

http://www.123rf.com/blog/blog.php?idblog=b1000041

Erick


« Reply #1 on: March 04, 2008, 09:56 »
0
Nothing about subscriptions. No more subsription ? Hurrah  ;D

helix7

« Reply #2 on: March 04, 2008, 10:28 »
0
Nothing about subscriptions. No more subsription ? Hurrah  ;D

I wish. :)


« Reply #3 on: March 04, 2008, 10:34 »
0
Nothing about subscriptions. No more subsription ? Hurrah  ;D

I wish. :)


me too,without any change in subs would possibly make subs more common in the end.

DanP68

« Reply #4 on: March 05, 2008, 00:00 »
0
I have to admit I am disappointed in the credits per size breakdown.

I like that 800 x 600 is up to 2 credits, but I find it troubling that my 30D's resolution has been so devalued.  There is no difference between the credit cost for a web resolution image from a P&S, and a full size 8.1mp shot out of a Canon 30D or equivalent.  If I understand this correctly, I will get no raise whatsoever from this, nor will anyone else with a camera less than 12.1 MP.  Please tell me I misunderstood.

I would have preferred they maintain a "Large size" in between for 3 credits, rather than jumping all the way to 12 MP Raw for the next size.

As it is, I am very happy with 123RF the last few months and excited about future prospects.  I just think they have more pricing power than they are using.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2008, 00:03 by DanP68 »

« Reply #5 on: March 05, 2008, 00:18 »
0
Dan they are not quoting megapixels, but file sizes (uncompressed).

If you look up the uncompressed file size in photoshop or equivalent program you'll see that an approx 10 million megapixel file is about a 25 MB file size.

Why they've priced in file sizes rather than image sizes is beyond me, but there you are.

DanP68

« Reply #6 on: March 05, 2008, 01:04 »
0
Thanks Hatman.  I should have noticed that myself.  Well that changes a lot, but you are right:  it is weird that they are based on file size instead of MP.

« Reply #7 on: March 05, 2008, 04:12 »
0
I just did a few calculations for new sizes and new credit prices they don't start until May 2008

Blog 400 x 300 1 credit                                 35c - 50c
Web 800 x 600 2 credits                               70c - $1.00
Print 12 MB RAW 3 credits  - 4 mp                $1.05 - $1.50
Ultra High 28 MB RAW 4 credits - 9.7mp        $1.40 - $2
Mega High 28 MB+ RAW 5 credits 9.7 mp+     $1.75 - $2.50
TIFF Download Highest res TIFF 10 credits    $3.50 - $5

A pity they choose 10mp instead of 8mp for the highest tier but a big increase for the smaller sizes

web 800 x 600 1 credit 37.5c - 50c
print 2mp          2 credit    75c - $1.00
highest             3 credit $1.12 - $1.50
« Last Edit: March 05, 2008, 04:22 by fintastique »

« Reply #8 on: March 05, 2008, 04:31 »
0
Thanks for that very useful:) I don t think it is worth it to send my 10 MP pics to them especially if they get downloaded by subscription....

« Reply #9 on: March 05, 2008, 08:17 »
0
Interesting strategy... Sounds like it may be more successful for the company than doing only subscription like SS.

If you have both, you will keep bigger files (likely) that will be available for subscription price unlike SS subscription only where some submitter are downsizing.

« Reply #10 on: March 05, 2008, 13:15 »
0
I downsize for SS yes. If I am correct at this time, royalties  for big sizes 12 MP are the highest for IS and StockXpert, FT does not pay much even for >30 MP....

« Reply #11 on: March 05, 2008, 15:12 »
0
These prices are way too low and suggest (to me) that 123 doesn't aspire to become a bigger player.

Sometimes prices can be TOO low and results in inability to attract customers.  We've all been there - seen something advertised at such a low price that our initial reaction isn't 'oh great' but 'at that price there must be a catch or something wrong'.

These low prices coupled with 123's preoccupation with the idea that photographers should 'give away web images for free to attract business' runs the risk that 123 will simply be seen as the bucket shop of the microstock industry.

Pricing is about 'getting it right' - the right combination of price and quality.  Too low suggests junk.

And what's all this about a 9.7mp image being 'mega big'?  10mp is pretty well standard for any point and shoot.  30mp is 'mega'.  10mp is standard.  Their marketing people have got this wrong.

Not impressed.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
6 Replies
3139 Views
Last post December 12, 2006, 10:39
by fotografer
3 Replies
1990 Views
Last post August 24, 2009, 10:18
by madelaide
4 Replies
3253 Views
Last post August 01, 2010, 22:48
by Angel
45 Replies
15562 Views
Last post May 19, 2012, 09:23
by stocker2011
16 Replies
3848 Views
Last post June 06, 2012, 02:55
by heywoody

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results